kristin.marvin

Thanks for your responses. Yes, sadly I can not afford L series lenses :( and so my lens is more amateur quality, and that may be part of the problem. Luckily, the fog spot on the inside of my zoom lens cleared after a couple of weeks, so that's lucky. I wasn't sure if I could wipe off the fog from the exterior of the lens or if doing that would scratch it. I have seen the pro-UV and anti-UV filter debates, but I think I am going to be on the pro side for protection of the lens. :) Also need a polarizing filter for landscapes, but that's another topic entirely! :) Thanks for all of your responses.

I don't think it's an "ethics" thing, but a preference thing. Personally, I would remove things like blemishes, but scars, moles, etc, I would not remove unless specifically asked. I can't answer for everyone, but I would feel silly to show a photo of myself to someone that didn't look like me! A mole gone, especially one like in this photo, would be a distraction. I would imagine viewers would say "where'd her mole go?" and not "what a nice smile." or whatever. Make-up, when applied correctly, should NOT look like you're wearing makeup. I view photo retouching in the same light. The more noticeable the correction is, the more "fake" it looks. But then, if I have a style, it's more documentary than to glamorize.

 

And I don't think photography is "lying." I think the goal of the process- from looking through the viewfinder to compose the shot to selecting shutter speeds, and post processing is done to make the photo interesting enough that people want to view it, and to get across the photographer's perception of what s/he photographed. It's ART. Was Monet "lying" when he painted his impressionist water lillies and Japanese bridges? So, I say, if you're shooting a model for your purposes as a photographer- post process away! But if doing a portrait of a person to give to them, let them make the call.

 

I'm no pro, but that's my two cents.

Lex, thanks for the tip. It never even occurred to me that a UV filter would take the brunt of the fogging. I am very new to this, obviously, and so I have yet to get any filters. I think this is a mistake, and that I should get some. So far, I have learned from reading that a UV filter will help with protecting the lens when dropped (which hopefully never happens, but, who knows) and now fog. And I'd rather replace a UV filter than an entire lens. Thanks so much.

When I took my zoom lens to Puerto Vallarta last summer, it developed a foggy spot from the humidity that took

weeks to clear. The last time I went out, it was cold, and again, fog on the lens. (Though, it wasn't nearly as

bad as the humidity.) The cold fog didn't seem to really affect my photos, but the humidity fog was AWFUL, and

there is the same unsharp spot in all my Puerto Vallarta pics with that lens (which, of course, I didn't notice

until I was at home and they were on my computer screen). I did some research on this and the only things I

could find were to "wait it out" and advise on putting the lenses in plastic bags before I come in from the cold

until they completely warm up (which I did). Is there any way to prevent, or minimize the fog that forms from

cold and humidity in the first place? I would assume spraying some kind of anti-fog on the lens front is a

terrible idea. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thanks!

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

By the way, I looked at your webpage (linked through your profile here) and you have some truly amazing photos. I only looked at your travel section, but the lighting in Carlsbad Caverns was beautiful, and I very much liked the Mexico series as well... (I am going to Puerto Vallarta in less than a month and can't wait to see what I am able to capture!)

 

:)

I think I am going to go with your first suggestion, the 55-250 mm. The reviews seem great and since I am just an avid amateur, I don't think I need anything too fancy! The one you suggested gives me room to be creative without breaking my bank!

Thank you so much!! I was uneasy about it and am glad I didn't purchase. Think I will hold out for something else. :)

I know someone who is upgrading and has offered to sell me his Canon EF 100-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Lens and his

Cannon 28-105 lens (neither are IS) with hoods and UV filters for $500/all. Is this a good deal? I read an

article that said that the pair was a good combo to have. I know this person personally and I don't want to rip

him off and don't think he would do that to me, either, but just figured I'd check. Lenses are in good

condition- he bought them for his Digital Rebel XTi (which I have) and is upgrading and no longer needs these

lenses. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Thank you so much for your answers... I did go to best buy and tried an IS lens out and I think it would help me a lot. I think i'm going to get the Canon 55-250 mm IS lens. Also thanks for the information about the hood and polarizing lens, also- I tend to shoot my kids outside in the sun and also with a trip to Mexico coming up I think it would be a good idea to invest in one. :)

Can anyone tell me why I would want/need a lens hood or filter for my lenses?

Or point me in the direction of a good resource that discusses this? I noticed

in my Canon XTi owner's manual it mentioned that if you're too close to a

subject with a lens hood you can get shadows or screw up the picture, but is

there a reason to shoot with a lens hood on? are there specific circumstances

where you would want one v. not having one?

 

Also, I didn't realize (since this is my first SLR) that the "kit lens) did not

zoom like my point and shoot... so what is a good zoom lens for beginners? I

want something that will zoom up on, say, my kids playing soccer while I'm on

the sidelines without the blurring that you get from the "digital zoom" feature

on point-and-shoots. I have looked into it and saw reviews on the 300 mm lens

(which, also, I have no idea what the mm numbers mean) and said that above 200

mm it's fuzzy, and so not worth it. Can anyone offer advice or resources on the

topic?

 

Thanks! Hopefully one day (sooner rather than later) I'll find it comical how

little I really know about photography at the moment. I read a review warning

future purchasers of my camera that they'd soon be "lusting for lenses" and i

totally dismissed it, but now I see that it is so true!

Thanks for all the good insight. I definitely do NOT want to sell my photos anywhere- I have zero aspirations of ever making any money off of my photographs (which is good, since I am not a highly skilled photographer). Luckily for me, my dad is a legal expert in the area of intellectual property, so I will run the issue by him and report back regarding what he says. :)

 

I also like the idea of getting to know people when getting their picture- my favorites are always the ones with the accompanying background story- but I am painfully apprehensive about initiating conversations with strangers. Maybe it will be good social practice as well. I like the point to the camera, point to the subject questioningly approach. And carrying a small notebook to jot down email addresses (yay digital photos) to email people their pictures if they want them is a good idea. One of the photos on my site is a picture of a guy I know professionally- he happens to live in my area and I ran into him and his family on the beach. he hadn't realized I took the picture of him and his daughter (cropped version of daughter only is on here) but was very happy I did because he liked "the moment" that was captured. But again, he is not a total stranger.

 

I will have to work on this. :)

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

That was my thought too, Don- I don't want to ruin a "moment" and by having someone be aware of having their photo taken... I actually found the other form that Jay suggested and read through that info, which I found to be extremely helpful. As a paralegal by trade, I understand the technical legal details, but I don't want someone getting an attitude wtih me, either. As a parent, of course, I don't photograph children who aren't mine or those of people I know, unless it's a group shot of people on a carousel or something. Thank you for the insight- hopefully I will muster the courage to get some good portraits- as I said, DC is full of interesting subjects.

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

I have a question- I live around DC and have often seen people on the streets or

the metro, etc, that would make great subjects for photographs, but I am not

sure how that works. How do you approach a subject and ask to take their

picture? There was a woman on the metro the other day dressed up and looking

very apprehensive, would have made a great portrait, was she going to a job

interview? court? a date? But I don't know the "rules" on photographing real

people- do you ask them? or get a zoom lens and hope they don't notice? or

just snap away and hope they don't get mad? I wouldn't want to invade someone's

privacy but there are many interesting subjects in DC... any insight would be

greatly appreciated